Yealm Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that staff protected people from avoidable harm and made sure care was delivered from environments that were clean and well maintained. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed all risks.

An annual fire risk assessment had been completed in March 2025. The service had recognised this was overdue and had a date scheduled for completion. The service conducted weekly fire tests and staff completed fire training, as well as staff trained as fire marshals.

The service had recognised they were not routinely recording fire drills. A system and process had been established to address this, which had commenced but required time to be fully embedded. We evidenced that a fire escape pathway to the external of the premises had roof tiles, tree debris and a piece of medical equipment creating blockages.

Following our site visit, the service sent evidence of having taken the required actions to clear the fire escape pathway and to show this had been added to the monthly premise check list, to ensure it would be routinely checked as part of ongoing risk assessing processes.

There were contracts to ensure the premises were maintained. For example, gas and electrical equipment had annual servicing and medical equipment was calibrated in line with manufacturers recommendations. Safety alerts relating to equipment were shared with the relevant staff and acted on. Portable appliances were tested on an annual basis. Records viewed showed maintenance checks had been completed.

The service had a business continuity plan which was regularly reviewed and outlined how the service should continue to operate in the event of a disruption.

The service was accessible for all people and included space for wheelchairs and prams. Hallways and corridors were clean and tidy and free from clutter. Staff offices were secure, and access was restricted from the public.

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The service employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, nurses and dispensary staff. We reviewed records of staff training, which showed that not all staff were up-to-date with their training, which the service had deemed mandatory. This had been recognised by the service and protected learning time had been arranged for staff to complete their training. Following our site visit, the service sent evidence to show this had been completed.

The service followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, review of qualifications, obtaining of professional references and a criminal records check.

Learning needs and the development of staff was managed appropriately. Staff were working within their agreed areas of competence. Staff told us their development and support were a priority to management, and staff had developed into additional roles including lead roles. Staff were encouraged to access additional training they felt would support their development. All staff had annual appraisals that focussed on development and staff wellbeing.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

During our visit, the service's premises and a sample of equipment reviewed were noted to be visibly clean. The service had cleaning schedules available, which outlined how staff should clean the building and its equipment. Cleaners completed cleaning schedules detailing daily and weekly tasks they completed. There was a communication book to liaise with the cleaners. They demonstrated how these were monitored for completion to maintain oversight of cleaning arrangements.

The service’s infection prevention and control (IPC) lead conducted regular risk assessments and audits to ensure compliance and acted where necessary to mitigate any identified risks.

Staff had completed relevant training in IPC.

Clinical rooms had adequate provision of personal protective equipment (PPE) and handwashing facilities.

The service held records of staff immunisations, to ensure staff and people using the service were protected against infectious diseases.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.